Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,714   Posts: 1,483,032   Online: 744
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11
    Fintan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Ireland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,792
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by patashnik View Post
    Price isn't the big issue really, but I'm hoping to keep it within $1200-1500. Is this realistic?

    Any input is appreciated
    Within your budget, this was posted on the Hasselblad mailing list today by one of the regulars;

    http://www.rob168.com/camera/Hass3.htm
    www.fpworkshops.com
    Film Photography Workshops - Ireland

  2. #12
    Mark Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Chicago
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,614
    Images
    151
    I had the same decision. I decided to go with an overhauled 500cm kit from David Odess. I figured that it would be basically a new camera at that point and wouldn't fail me at a bad time. One of my fears with Hasselblad was that even a few year old camera could have an awful lot of film put through it when I got it. I did get a 50mm and a 150mm used, but I figured I can always get by with only two of three lenses if I needed to.

    Mark

  3. #13
    André E.C.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,520
    Images
    12
    Are you planing to go longer than 150mm?

    If not, the mirror isn't an issue, get one good condition 500 CM and invest in good glass.


    Cheers



    André

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by André E.C. View Post
    Are you planing to go longer than 150mm?

    If not, the mirror isn't an issue, [...]
    ... unless you are planing to do some close up work and are going to put your lenses on tubes or even bellows.

  5. #15
    André E.C.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,520
    Images
    12
    Where is the bloody dilemma with the mirror, mr. QG?

    Is it really serious? It's on your negative, or only on screen?:o

    I think it's only on screen and I have used tubes and teleconverters with a Sonnar CF 150mm for close up work, and my negatives came out perfect, maybe I was just lucky then.

    Don't be so darn perfect, let the guy buy his Swedish cube!



    André

  6. #16
    Andrew Moxom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Keeping the British end up in Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,853
    Images
    327
    Remember one thing, the worst thing you can do to a hasselblad is not run film through it. They like to be exercised as do the lenses. Used is fine, as they are weill built cameras and I have never had a problem with mine. I've used a 21mm tube on my 150 sonnar, and I do no thave the gliding mirror.... Images are fine, composition on the screen is also not that bad.
    Please check out my website www.amoxomphotography.com and APUG Portfolio .....

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by André E.C. View Post
    Where is the bloody dilemma with the mirror, mr. QG?

    Is it really serious? It's on your negative, or only on screen?:o

    I think it's only on screen and I have used tubes and teleconverters with a Sonnar CF 150mm for close up work, and my negatives came out perfect, maybe I was just lucky then.

    Don't be so darn perfect, let the guy buy his Swedish cube!


    André
    It's on the screen only, yes.
    I have done lots of close-up work, and can tell you it sucks not to know where the frame ends. Not to know what's in the frame, and what's not.
    Reason why i bought me the Hasselblad with better mirror then: an 2000-series focal plane body.

    I also use the 120 mm and 250 mm lenses al lot. Same thing: a nuissance.
    The 120 mm, though being shorter, is worse than the 150 mm when viewfinder vignetting is concerned (it's the exit pupil position, not the focal length that counts. Which is why the thing appears when you move the exit pupil away from the film by inserting tubes between other lenses and camera too. Or even when using the extension in the lens mount itself).
    Use this lens close-up and the guessing-nuissance begins again.

    Same with the 250 mm lens (which already shows the maximum amount of viewfinder vignetting you get. Now it's the mirror size, not the exit pupil position, that is setting the amount of vignetting. Longer lenses produce the same amount of viewfinder vignetting.)

    So it's also on film: you do not know quite what's in frame, so you allow for that, and cannot frame as precise as you would have liked.
    And it can fool you easily too, making you compose inside the bit you see, forgetting about the missing bit on top. Strange pictures, with lots of room above the subject ar the result.

    But many, many Hasselblad photographers have made do with the too small mirror, and it hasn't stopped them producing beautiful image.
    So you get used to it.

    So do not let it deter you from buying a 500 C/M or 501 C (without M). Despite having a bunch of cameras with larger mirror, i still use a 500 C/M myself too, now and again.

    But given a choice, do yourself a favour, and get the camera with the larger mirror; the 503 CW or 501 CM.
    Last edited by Q.G.; 07-28-2008 at 12:55 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin